BUSINESS MANAGEMENT A+ WORK, ON TIME, NO PLAGARIZING; ON TIME

MGKT600EBSCO-FullText-05_17_20261GLOBAL.pdf

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Management homework help >BUSINESS MANAGEMENT A+ WORK, ON TIME, NO PLAGARIZING; ON TIME

[PMH 3.3 (2008) 213-231] Popular Music History (print) ISSN 1740-7133 doi:10.1558/pomh.v3i3.213 Popular Music History (online) ISSN 1743-1646

Dave Laing

World Music and the global music industry: Flows, corporations and networks

Dave Laing is Visiting Research Fellow at the Insti- tute of Popular Music, University of Liverpool. As a researcher and author, he has written, edited and contributed to numerous books and encyclopae- dias. His most recent book is Buddy Holly, in Equi- nox’s Icons of Pop series, of which he is co-editor with Jill Halstead.

27 Hiley Road London NW10 5PT UK [email protected]

Abstract This article provides a sketch of the main features of the global macro-economy of music followed by comments on World Music and its relation to the macro-economy. The article contains key financial data of the worldwide music industry in 2006 and an estimate of the royalty flows between global regions. The corporate structures of the major international music companies are analysed. The main characteristics of World Music as a ‘genre-market’ and as a sub-set of the global music industry are discussed.

Keywords: African music, genre-markets, globalization, music industry, world music

World Music is often analysed as an interlinked series of music genres that can be specified from an ethnomusicological perspective. But in its contemporary form it is also part of a cultural economy, a sub-set of the global music industry. The pur- pose of this chapter is to provide a sketch of the main features of the global macro- economy of music followed by comments on the World Music ‘genre-market’ and its relation to the macro-economy. The chapter has four sections. It begins with a definition of the music indus- try worldwide. This is followed by a summary of the key financial data of the industry and an estimate of the royalty flows of the music industry between glo- bal regions. The third section deals with the corporate structures of the industry. The final section considers the main characteristics of World Music as a cultural industry.

214 PoPular Music History

Definition of the music industry worldwide The past twenty years has seen a growing interest by national governments in the potential economic value of the music industry as a source of employment and of export earnings. In addition, the industry has become an enthusiastic lobbyist for government assistance, notably in strengthening intellectual property legislation. In this context, a demand has grown for data, for statistical proof of the music indus- try’s importance and success. As such, various formulae have been developed to describe and analyse the industry, in particular in various European countries. One tendency has been to magnify the size and importance of the industry by using a ‘maximalist’ definition. For example, the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI), the non-governmental organization that rep- resents the interests of record companies, produced an estimate that ‘the value of the wider music economy’ in 2005 was US$100 billion (IFPI 2006a). Besides global retail sales of recorded music worth US$33 billion, IFPI included in this total the markets for music publishing rights, commercial radio advertising, sat- ellite radio subscriptions, live music performances and portable digital music players. The justification for annexing a segment of the broadcasting industry was that the recorded music industry ‘is the engine helping to drive a much broader music sector’. John Williamson and Martin Cloonan (2007) have critiqued the assertion of the primacy of recorded music in the overall industry sector. Instead, these authors argue, there is no unitary industry of music, but a plurality of discrete music industries, of which the recording sector is one among equals, rather than the dominant core of the music industry. In particular, Williamson and Cloonan point to the ascendancy of the ‘live’ music business in recent years, contrasting it to the declining fortunes of the record companies.1

In what follows, I have adopted a narrower definition of the music industry than IFPI’s ‘driver’-based version, and, in contrast to Williamson and Cloonan, the industry is regarded as a unitary business sector, albeit one in which sub-sectors have a relatively autonomous relationship to each other. The definition limits the

1. Another definitional question concerns the fundamental character of the music indus- try or industries. Is it (are they) a cultural industry, a creative industry or a copyright industry? It has become fashionable, not least within the industry itself, to refer to the music business as a ‘copyright’ or ‘rights’ owning industry. This sounds more elegant than the designation of music as a ‘manufacturing industry’, although it is that also. In fact, the degree to which copyright ownership and copyright legal systems are central varies between sectors. The copy- right dimension is most vital to music publishing and least important in live music (concert promoters, unlike songwriters and record companies, do not own intellectual property). On this point, see Laing 2002.

World Music and tHe global Music industry 215

music industry to those practices directly producing and disseminating music com- positions, recordings and performances. This narrow version could legitimately be expanded by including such indirect practices as the manufacture and dissemination of musical instruments and asso- ciated technologies, and the training and education of musicians and music indus- try personnel. But for present purposes these have been disregarded.

Financial data and royalty flows of the music industry worldwide The three sub-sectors of the industry under the narrow definition are:

The recording industryi. music publishingii. ‘live’ performanceiii.

This section presents the estimated 2006 turnover of each sub-sector in billions of U.S. dollars spent by end-users, both individual consumers and corporate users such as broadcasters, sponsors and film companies. The gross turnover of the recording industry sub-sector is estimated to be US$44.8 billion. The five compo- nents of this figure appear in Table 1:

Table 1. Recording industry turnover 2006 (US$ billion)

Category Turnover

IFPI retail world sales (42 countries) 28.3

Retail sales in (150) ‘non-IFPI’ countries 20.9

Pirate retail sales (IFPI data) 24.5

Synchronization, performance and private copying fees 21.1

Downloads and MPRTs2 (retail value) 10.0

TOTAL 44.8 2

The first component of the recording industry turnover is the retail value of ‘world sales’ of physical soundcarriers (principally CDs, music DVDs and music cassettes). This figure is calculated annually by IFPI. The 2006 total of US$28.3 billion was 5% less than in 2005. It should be noted that ‘world sales’ reflects the recorded music market in a relatively small number of countries. IFPI provides further details in its annual publication Global Recording Industry in Numbers. The most recent edition of this publication (IFPI 2006c) provides detailed statistics for 2005 from 42 national music markets, mainly in Europe (21), the

2. MPRT stands for mobile telephone ring tones.

216 PoPular Music History

Americas (7) and Asia (11).3 The only African country included is South Africa. The reason for the limited coverage of these world sales statistics is that IFPI relies for its data on national recording industry associations that exist only in countries with a conventional recorded music market regulated by intellectual property regimes and structured around the activities of multinational companies. Else- where, IFPI’s member companies (led by the multinationals) generally have little or no direct presence. Because of this gap, the second component of Table 1 is an estimate of record industry retail sales in the numerous countries not included in IFPI’s world sales. The third component of Table 1 is the retail value of unauthorized (or pirate) sales of CDs, music DVDs and music cassettes. This figure is supplied in another IFPI document, Recording Industry Piracy Report (IFPI 2006b). In 2005, the most recent year for which figures are available, IFPI estimated that spending on these prod- ucts was $US4.5 billion. The piracy sector is a ‘shadow’ economy, mimicking the manufacturing and distribution practices of the legitimate industry (legitimate in the sense that it conforms to copyright regimes and is authorized to commodify artists’ and composers’ works). It is important to distinguish between the piracy sector and what might be termed the ‘gift economy’ of recorded music. This consists primarily of various forms of private copying, from the widespread ‘home taping’ of the 1970s and 1980s to CD burning and online peer-to-peer file-sharing, often referred to as P2P. While there have been attempts to estimate the financial ‘losses’ caused by the gift economy, its primary feature is that it is not monetized, at least at the P2P level. IFPI estimated that there were 20 billion tracks ‘illegally downloaded’ in this gift economy in 2005 (IFPI 2006b: 4). The fourth component of Table 1 is the gross revenue received by the record industry from three sources in addition to retail sales. These are the inclusion of recorded music in films and broadcast programmes (synchronization), royalties from radio and television broadcasts and from clubs and discotheques (perform- ance right fees) and payments from the royalty fees imposed in many countries on the wholesale price of copying equipment (private copying fees). Detailed figures on 2005 performance right payments are published in the 2006 edition of Global Recording Industry in Numbers (IFPI 2006c). The final component of Table 1 is the newest and fastest-growing source of revenue for the recording industry. Based on IFPI’s calculation that the net

3. In past years, IFPI published data from as many as 75 countries including nine in the Middle East and a larger number of European markets as well as Zimbabwe and Kenya. It is unclear why the amount of published data has been reduced.

World Music and tHe global Music industry 217

revenue of the recording industry from sales of digital downloads and mobile telephone ring tones (MPRTs) was US$3.5 billion, consumer spending on these products is estimated to have been at least US$10 billion. The differ- ence between the two figures includes the proportion of retail value taken by such intermediaries as telecommunication network suppliers, online retailers such as Apple’s iTunes and companies that specialize in creating and marketing MPRTs. The second of the three sub-sectors that comprise the music industry is music publishing. The gross global turnover of the music publishing sub-sector in 2006 is estimated to have been $US9.6 billion. The components of this figure appear in Table 2.

Table 2. Music publishing turnover 2006 (US$ billion)

Category Turnover

Collection society domestic collections 7.7

Synchronization fees 1.1

Printed music 0.8

TOTAL 9.6

Although the gross turnover of publishing is less than a fifth of the recording sec- tor, the percentage that reaches the creative artist is much higher. Some estimates are that almost all songwriter/performers receive at least as much from their publishing royalties as from record sales. Royalty collections by authors’ societies make up the largest component of music publishing revenues. The basic rationale of these organizations, also known as collection societies, performing right organizations or collective administration bodies, is explained in Phil Hardy’s article in this journal issue. The proxy for the 2006 total given in Table 2 is a calculation of the 2004 revenues of such societies published by the Confédération Internationale des Sociétiés d’Auteurs et Com- positeurs (CISAC). This document, Authors’ Rights in the World (CISAC 2007), states that global music royalties of these societies was almost $US7 billion. In calculat- ing the equivalent total for 2006, an increase of 5% for each of 2005 and 2006 has been assumed. The music publishing royalties derived from digital downloads and MPRTs are included here. Other elements of the music publishing business are handled not by the socie- ties, but by individual music publishing companies. The most important of these is the second component of Table 2, synchronization—the licensing of composi- tions for use in films, commercials and broadcasts. Music publishers and specialist distributors also organize the sale of printed copies of music, the third component

218 PoPular Music History

of Table 2. Until the middle of the twentieth century, this was a central part of the music publishing industry. It is now a small element of that business, mainly com- prising educational material and songbooks, although it has been reinvigorated by the advent of the Internet, where consumers can download printed music from a number of authorized websites. The third and final sub-sector is the performance or live music industry whose gross turnover in 2006 is estimated to be approximately US$20 billion. The com- ponents of this figure appear in Table 3:

Table 3. Live music turnover 2006 (US$ billion)

Category Turnover

Ticket sales 12.5

Sponsorship and subsidy 22.0

Merchandising 24.7

Broadcast, webcast and live CD fees 20.8

TOTAL 20.0

The consensus of opinion among observers of the music industry is that the num- bers of concerts, festivals and other performances have been growing at a fast rate in the last decade. Unlike the other sectors, there is no global industry organiza- tion for live music to provide reliable or regular statistics. However, IFPI included an amount for ‘live music’ of US$14.4 billion in its ‘value of the wider music indus- try’ (IFPI 2006a). IFPI did not explain how this total was determined; in particular whether it was restricted to the retail value of tickets for performances or whether it included the further revenue sources listed in Table 3. As the Table shows, ticket sales comprise the majority of revenues for the live music industry. The other components are led by sponsorship and subsidy. Sponsorship payments are made by commercial organizations whose names are then associated with tours, festivals or even con- cert venues, and subsidy refers to payments by public bodies such as governments, city councils and charitable trusts. The third component of Table 3 is the sale of merchandise linked to perform- ers. Merchandise includes clothing such as caps or T-shirts, posters and tour pro- grammes. Finally, concert promoters may increase the revenue from live events by selling broadcasting and webcasting rights and even producing CDs of an event for sale after the show or by mail order. Unlike the Tables for the other sub-sectors, this Table excludes Western classical music. This genre has a peculiar economic structure in which institu- tions such as opera houses, ballet companies and symphony orchestras receive

World Music and tHe global Music industry 219

large state subsidies or charitable donations often amounting to over 50% of turnover. Table 4 collates the total revenues of the three sub-sectors and includes an ‘adjustment’ that removes intra-sector payments to avoid double-counting. These payments consist almost entirely of composer and publisher royalties paid to col- lection societies by record companies and by live music promoters. The resulting total is $US71.9 billion.

Table 4. Total adjusted music industry revenues 2006 (US$ billion)

Sub-sector Turnover

Recording 44.8

Publishing 29.6

Live music 20.0

Adjustment ((2.5)

TOTAL 71.9

The music industry’s worldwide revenues in 2006 were smaller than those of the film industry ($80bn according to PriceWaterhouseCoopers) and the illicit drugs market ($322bn according to the United Nations).

The financial flows between regions The second section of this chapter is concerned with the import and export flows on music in 2006. These flows are based on the sales and (paid for) per- formances of ‘foreign’ music in each region of the world. The monies derive mainly from royalties due from sales of recordings or from public perform- ances including broadcasts, rather than from imported physical products.4 Table 5 shows the estimated percentages of ‘local’ and ‘foreign’ music sold as recordings and broadcast on radio and television in each of the five global regions. Here ‘local’ means music created within the region, so that, for exam- ple, recordings of British musicians sold in Germany or broadcast in Sweden are classified as ‘local’.

4. While UNESCO has published a report on flows of cultural goods, its source data is drawn from customs information on tangible products, which in the case of music means CDs and DVDs. The report admits that it cannot ‘provide a comprehensive picture of the direction and magnitude of international music flows’ because ‘much of the trade occurs in the form of original masters which are then processed locally for domestic retail distribution’ (UNESCO 2005: 40).

220 PoPular Music History

Table 5. Origins of recorded music sales and music broadcasts by region in 2006 (%)

Sales of local recordings

Sales of foreign recordings

Broadcasts of local music

Broadcasts of foreign music

North America 92 28 85 15

Europe 66 34 75 25

Asia-Pacific 70 30 80 20

Latin America 60 40 70 30

Africa n/a n/a n/a n/a

n/a = not available

The percentage figures in Table 5 are derived mainly from Global Recording Industry in Numbers (IFPI 2006c) and the published accounts of authors’ collection societies affiliated to CISAC. Because there is almost no information available from these sources about African music and media markets, the Table contains no percent- ages for sales and broadcasts in that region. The difference between the percentages of local (i.e. regional) music in CD and cassette sales and in broadcasts can be linked to their different consumers. Sur- veys in several developed countries have found that only about one-third of the adult population ever buys a CD or cassette and their average age is lower than that of the almost 100% of the adult population that are radio listeners. The much larger radio audience contains an older demographic that in general has a greater cultural conservatism. ‘Oldies’ stations and national language music stations cater for this segment of the population in the larger countries of non-Anglophone Europe, Latin America and the Asia-Pacific region. As a result, the amount of air- play for regionally-created music is higher than the sales of such music in four out of the five regions. In North America, mainly the United States, the difference is reversed. In this region, there is a segment of the older audience (drawn from the so-called ‘baby boomers’ born between the late 1940s and early 1960s) that remains entranced with the rock music of the 1960s and 1970s. This broad genre contains a large pro- portion of foreign (mostly British) music from The Beatles to Led Zeppelin. These recordings continue to secure airplay and thus earn considerable royalties for their authors. Table 6 shows the estimated amounts in billions of US dollars of ‘imports’ and ‘exports’ flowing as royalties and concert and festival fees between the five global regions.

World Music and tHe global Music industry 221

Table 6. Music industry exports and imports by region in 2006 (US$ billion)

N. America Exports

Europe Exports

Asia- Pacific Exports

L. America Exports

Africa Exports

TOTALS

N. America Imports — 0.55 20.05 0.4 220.05 21.05

Europe Imports 1.0 — 0.1 0.2 0.1 1.4

Asia-Pacific Imports 0.2 0.15 — 0.1 220.05 0.41

L. America Imports 20.04 0.05 20.01 — 220.05 0.15

Africa Imports n/a n/a n/a n/a — n/a

TOTALS 1.24 0.75 20.07 0.7 20.25

n/a = not available

This table translates into dollar values the percentages for foreign music in Table 5, adding to these payments from international tours in the live music sub-sector. The amounts in each box reflect the relative sizes of the regional markets. Europe accounts for about 37% of the retail value of the global recorded music market and almost 50% of the music publishing market. North American music represents a large proportion of the ‘foreign’ 34% of European sales and 25% of European air- play, and these minority percentages plus touring fees translate into exports to Europe of about a billion dollars a year in licensing, royalty and concert appear- ance payments. Similarly, the very large size of the North American market brings some US$550 million to European music business from sales, airplay and tours in the United States and Canada. The relatively small music markets of the other three regions in finan- cial terms is reflected in the low figures for both imports and exports. The Asia- Pacific region, for example, has exports of US$70 million and imports of US$410 million, much of the latter represented by Japanese consumption of foreign music. It is worth adding that within regions there are wide national variations. Inside North America, only the USA invariably has greater imports than exports. In Europe, at a national level, the UK and Sweden generally have a positive export balance. A comparison of the totals of imports and exports for each region show that both North America and Latin America have a positive balance of trade, the lat- ter because of its export success with the large Hispanic population of the US. In contrast, both Europe and Asia-Pacific have a negative trade balance; in the case of Europe, this is due to the imbalance between its imports from North America and its exports to that region. Because of a lack of data on domestic cultural industry markets, no compari- son between imports and exports can be made for Africa. However, while Table 6

222 PoPular Music History

has no data for music imports, it includes a total of $US250 million for exports of African music. This figure is the estimated amount paid for sales of African record- ings, earnings of African composers and concert and festival fees for African musi- cians. Almost all of these exports (plus smaller amounts of exports from the other regions) derive from the World Music genre-market that is discussed in detail in the final section of this chapter.

Corporate structures of the industry It has become routine to categorize firms in both the recording and music pub- lishing sectors as either ‘majors’ or ‘independents’. Such thinking became ortho- dox in the 1960s and it was already commonplace in analyses of the United States music market of the 1940s and 1950s. This binary formed the core of influential explanations of the evolution of the record industry in the mid-twentieth cen- tury. Richard Peterson and David Berger (1975) used hit parade statistics to show how independent companies were the vehicle for the rise of rock ’n’ roll while Charlie Gillett (1996) showed in detail how the entrepreneurs who created the newly formed independents of the 1950s and 1960s were catalysts for the inno- vations of that era in their role as record producer, arranger and/or songwriter. While these pioneering studies emphasized the polar opposition between majors and independents, later accounts focused on the interaction between them. In these versions, independents were the ‘unofficial Artist & Repertoire’ arms of the majors, discovering and experimenting with new talent before such talent was lured away by a contract with a major. The paradigmatic example was Elvis Pres- ley, first recorded by Memphis studio and label owner Sam Phillips who subse- quently sold Elvis’s contract to RCA Records. Majors also formed strategies of creating joint ventures or distribution agreements with independents, often as a prelude to acquiring them. The standard definition of a major record company in the last quarter of the last century was that it owned and controlled the marketing, manufacturing and distribution of its products, in addition to contracting artists and creating record- ings. These companies also had an expanding international presence through the formation of wholly-owned recording and publishing subsidiaries in the 1980s in Asia and Latin America and in the 1990s in Eastern Europe. The independents, on the other hand, operated only in talent acquisition and the creation of recordings. In addition, the leading majors were international, even global, in their sphere of activity. Over the past half century, the number of major companies has decreased, and their corporate ownership, structures and strategies have changed. In the early 1990s there were seven transnational companies (TNCs) in the music recording

World Music and tHe global Music industry 223

and publishing industry. Since then, there has been a decade of falling soundcar- rier sales and the enormous growth of the Internet. The response of the TNCs to this has been mainly defensive as they ‘consolidated’ through mergers and acqui- sitions, ‘downsized’ through reductions in staff and artist rosters, ‘outsourced’ by selling off manufacturing, distribution and some ‘back-office’ functions and reversed their geographical expansion—in their present posture, the music indus- try TNCs will not invest in Africa. At the time of writing the number of TNCs had been reduced to four, with the distinct likelihood of a further reduction to three. The four were Universal Music Group, a subsidiary of Vivendi, the French-owned media and utilities conglomer- ate; Sony BMG, a joint venture between the Japanese electronics firm and the Ger- man media and print publishing corporation Bertelsmann, created by the merger of two competing TNCs in 2003; EMI Group, a British owned music company; and Warner Music Group, a U.S.-based music group that had been sold off in 2002 by the world’s largest media group, Time Warner. According to the media analysts Berg Insight, the 2006 global market shares of recorded music sales of the four TNCs, based on sales of ‘owned repertoire’ were: Universal 26%, Sony BMG 25%, EMI 11% and Warner 10%. The remaining 28% was split between the many hundreds of independent record companies. The com- bined share of TNCs in the global music publishing market is smaller. In 2005, the market leader was EMI with 16.3%, followed by Warner Chappell (owned by Warner) with 16.0%, BMG (wholly owned by Bertelsmann) with 13.8%, Univer- sal with 12.5% and Sony-ATV (owned by Sony with Michael Jackson as minority shareholder) with 7.4%. The business culture and prime strategy of the TNCs is one of market control and a centre to periphery panoptic command structure.5 The centralized control culture was summarized by a Sony BMG executive who told an interviewer in 2005: ‘When every territory defines its own priorities and has its own way of doing things you diffuse your global effort. So often people are myopic about their own markets’ (Cobo 2005: 45). The tactics intended to achieve market control mainly derive from the situa- tion of oligopolistic power of the four TNCs, who control over 70% of the global recording market. The tactics range from the more-or-less illegal exertion of influ- ence on promotional media to frequent divisional restructurings at the behest of consultants and ‘modern’ management theories. The most widespread and old-

5. ‘Panoptic’ is a reference to the panopticon, a nineteenth-century design for a building such as a school or prison in which every room or area was visible from a single central point. The term was taken up by Michel Foucault to exemplify a general regime of power in which individuals are placed in ‘a state of conscious and permanent visibility’ (Foucault 1977: 195).

224 PoPular Music History

est means of exerting influence is ‘payola’, the bribing of broadcasters to ensure maximum airplay for a company’s recordings. Payola was first investigated in the late 1950s in the United States but its most recent manifestation occurred in 2005 when the attorney general of New York State exposed widespread inducements to radio programmers. The TNCs eventually agreed to pay millions of dollars to the state government in settlement of the investigation. The restructuring undertaken by the four TNCs frequently involves redraw- ing the global map by creating new ‘regions’ of supervision and control. At Uni- versal, one senior manager is responsible for the ‘Mediterranean, South America and Middle East Region’ and another for an ‘Asia Pacific’ region that includes South Africa. At Sony BMG, however, South Africa is part of a ‘region’ with Eastern Europe and the Middle East. Until the past decade, the corporate structure of the live music industry was ‘pre-TNC’, taking the form of temporary national and international networks of local entrepreneurial concert promoters created to collaborate on specific tours. This changed at the end of the twentieth century, with the advent of the first TNCs, led by Live Nation and AEG, both U.S.-based concert promoters and venue opera- tors. Live Nation has bought out numerous local promoters in both the USA and Europe.

The World Music market within the macro-economy Much of the activity of the music industry is predicated on the existence of genre- markets. Keith Negus (1999) has undertaken the most substantial study to date of such markets in the context of the TNC recorded music companies, including case studies on rap, salsa and country music. Other genre-markets include classi- cal music, jazz, folk, heavy metal, Christian and gospel music and, of course, World Music. As a keynote to his study, Negus quotes Simon Frith on the formation of such genre-markets. Frith writes:

‘A new genre world’…is first constructed and then articulated through a complex interplay of musicians, listeners, and mediating ideologues, and this process is much more confused than the marketing process that follows, as the wider industry begins to make sense of the new sounds and markets and to exploit both genre worlds and genre discourses in the orderly routines of mass market- ing (Frith 1996: 88).

Frith’s metaphorical term ‘genre-world’ with its interactionist and sociological emphasis incorporates many features of what, from a cultural industries per- spective, I am calling the genre-market. Most such markets share three principal characteristics. In describing these features of genre-markets, I shall illustrate the discussion with examples drawn from the World Music genre-market.

World Music and tHe global Music industry 225

Firstly, these markets vertically segment the macro-economy of music as opposed to the horizontal segmentation of geo-political regions. Like jazz and Western classical music, World Music replicates its genre-market across national boundaries. The genre’s musicians can expect to find similarly acculturated pro- moters and audiences in Tokyo, Vienna and San Francisco. Nevertheless, this vertical segmentation is not found uniformly throughout the world. Paradoxically, World Music genre-markets exist most strongly in coun- tries that do not originate the music, but these markets are non-existent or barely existent in World Music’s countries of origin. In the terminology of the United Nations and its associated agencies, the split is almost equivalent to that between developed nations and developing ones. The second feature of genre-markets is that they are recognizable through, and recognize themselves in, representative institutions such as sales charts, radio for- mats, specialist written media, festivals, specialist record companies, trade asso- ciations and fairs and audience demographics. The relative weight of each type of institution varies between genre-markets in what Frith (1996) calls the ‘confused’ process of the construction of the genre-world. World Music is unusual, if not unique, in the fact that the moment at which the genre was named can be dated precisely to a 1987 meeting of British inde- pendent music company executives, planning a combined marketing campaign for their specialist areas of music. This story has been told by several authors, most cogently by Jan Fairley (2001). Other significant contributors to the consoli- dation of the genre-market included the decision of the influential United States industry publication Billboard to introduce a World Music top ten list in May 1990 (compiled from sales in 40 stores), followed by the first Grammy award for World Music the following year (Taylor 1997: 10-11). In Europe, the genre-market took shape through such institutions as the European Broadcasting Union’s monthly list of the most played albums by European specialist radio programmers (Fairley 2001); the proliferation of independent record companies such as Piranha (Ger- many), World Circuit (Britain) and Melodie (France); the prototype annual festi- val, WOMAD (World of Music and Dance), that now has expanded to eight events on three continents; and WOMEX, an annual trade fair for the World Music indus- try inaugurated in 2000. ‘Audience demographics’ was one of the institutional features listed earlier and it might be argued that the genre-market of World Music is primarily defined by its audience, especially in the metropoles of North America, Europe and parts of the Asia Pacific region. In those sites, World Music events are typically attended by varying combinations of ‘internationalist’ natives and members of diasporic communities from the countries of origin of the music. One British commenta-

226 PoPular Music History

tor rather dismissively defined the ‘native’ component of World Music enthusiasts as a ‘mature audience, nurtured on Sixties idealism, disillusioned with the vacu- ity of contemporary pop, and all ready to be awed by billowing robes and frenetic drumming’ (Hudson 1995). The musicologist Andy Nercessian (2002: 8) offers a more positive and less generation-specific definition of World Music fans as pos- sessing ‘the capacity of audiences from one culture to experience under suitable circumstances, perhaps as fully as audiences in the home culture, the music of a culture with which it is unfamiliar’. The third principal characteristic of genre-markets is the prevalence of con- troversy over the fundamentals of definitions and boundaries. Attempts to insti- tutionalize musicological, culturally-based or market-orientated definitions of genres incite disputes between and amongst academics and fans. Typically, these disputes are concerned with how, where and whether to draw lines of exclusion to safeguard the genre from contamination by adjacent (and implicitly inferior or unsuitable) musical spheres. One aphoristic definition of the World Music ethos is contained in the slogan of the British magazine fRoots: ‘local music from out there’. At its most literal, this position can seem over-naïve, implying that the ‘local music’ can be appreciated by audiences not from ‘out there’ but in here, without any feedback that could change the original character of the local music. One example of such feedback has been described by Thomas Turino (2000: 223) who argues that the ‘desires of worldbeat fans’ was the biggest influence on the evolution of the Zimbabwean guitar music in the 1980s and 1990s. While the fRoots slogan offers an explicit definition of the genre, the implicit definitions of World Music produced by the genre-market’s institutions can often differ widely and come into conflict. The Billboard chart of World Music, for exam- ple, includes some titles that would be excluded from similar European lists. Writ- ing in 1997, Timothy Taylor (1997: 9) had analysed Billboard’s listings between 1990 and 1996 and concluded ‘there is never any music from the far east’ and ‘even with the popularity of some African musicians, Western European and North Ameri- can musicians still sell the most’. A decade later, the 2005 version of this chart was equally vulnerable to this criticism. Taylor had noted a new chart trend of ‘Celtic’ music in the mid-1990s and by 2005 this was the dominant feature of the Billboard World Music chart. Six of the top 15 World Music albums of the year were by Irish musicians or were branded as ‘Celtic’. These included the no. 1 album by a vocal group named Celtic Woman and an album by Irish vocalist Daniel O’Donnell of songs made famous by the American country music singer Jim Reeves! At a different level, the World Music idea has been the site of a struggle between different factions of what Frith called the ‘mediating ideologues’. In par-

World Music and tHe global Music industry 227

ticular, the assumptions of the entrepreneurs and journalists of the genre-market have been challenged by some orthodox ethnomusicologists, with a consequent confusion in terminology and definition. This is exemplified by Philip Bohlman’s (2002) book World Music: A Very Short Introduction. From its title and its appear- ance in a series explicitly devoted to entry-level texts about a range of topic and themes, a reader would expect to find a tour d’horizon of the genre-field, akin to Philip Sweeney’s (1991) pioneering Directory of World Music or the much larger Rough Guides (Broughton et al. 2006). Instead, Bohlman devoted much of the book to a history of the field and discourse of ethnomusicology, adding a brief and somewhat dismissive section on the genre-field. A more nuanced and inclusive approach was taken by Steven Feld (2000) in his essay ‘A Sweet Lullaby for World Music’, that summarizes many of the dilemmas, fault-lines and paradoxes of the contemporary genre-world and genre-market. World Music occupies a small but unique niche in the US$79.1 billion global music industry described earlier in this chapter. Table 7 contains estimates of the gross spending on World Music in the three sub-sectors discussed previously. The total spending of US$1.4 billion represents 1.8% of the global industry.

Table 7. Turnover of the World Music genre-market 2006 (US$ million)

Turnover

Recording industry 1,540

Music publishing 1,560

Live music 1,800

TOTAL 1,400

As the table shows, the estimated turnover of the market is dominated by live music. Within that sub-sector, the notable feature has been the strong growth in the number of summer festivals specializing in World Music over the last decade, especially in Europe. The music publishing sector is weak mainly because of the very limited airplay for the genre, and because the sales of World Music record- ings represent an average of about 2% of the total market in North America, West- ern Europe and Japan. In the context of the recorded music macro-economy, therefore, World Music is a small ‘niche’ market. Because of this, the commitment of the four major TNCs to World Music has been fitful and patchy. The major recording companies were responsible for issuing only seven of the 47 new World Music albums of 2006 nominated by critics and radio presenters in a poll organized by fRoots (and the seven included releases by Bob Dylan and Bruce Springsteen). Similarly, the four majors distributed only one-third of the 90 albums to appear in the Billboard World

228 PoPular Music History

Music chart during 2005. In Latin America and Southern Europe, EMI and Univer- sal sometimes record and release albums of ‘World Music’ artists who are also local pop stars, for example Mariza (Portugal) and Marisa Monte (Brazil). In some cases, however, these companies do not make such albums available throughout North America or Western Europe because it is ‘uneconomic’ for them to do so. In the past, major companies have sometimes had temporary enthusiasms for the genre, as with jazz, only for the World Music initiative to be phased out after a few years.6 At present, a handful of leading African artists have recording deals with TNCs, notably Youssou n’Dour. He has had a contractual relationship with Warner, which issues his music on Nonesuch, a ‘contemporary’ music label whose cata- logue includes works by modernist composers such as Philip Glass and reissues of classic ethnomusicological field recordings. While the data presented in Table 6 did not distinguish the provenance of music exports by genre-market, the evidence from many countries is that a signif- icant minority of the export earnings of Latin America and Asia Pacific are derived from World Music. In the case of Africa, World Music is responsible for almost all of the US$250 million music export earnings shown in Table 6. These statistics alone do not, however, indicate how far these ‘export earnings’ contribute to the health of the domestic music industries of these regions of origin of World Music. One important factor in any discussion of this point is that there are music industries based on the North American and Western European models in many parts of both Latin America and the Asia Pacific region. Therefore, in Brazil or Mexico, Japan or Australasia, World Music’s practitioners have the possibility of inserting themselves as professionals into a domestic market structure. The situation is different and considerably more complex in much of the Afri- can continent where the existing music industries (like other parts of the econ- omy) often combine processes drawn from traditional pre-capitalist practices, such as patronage and gift economies with modernist or globalized technologies and market features. Pietilä (2009) examines such articulations in the South Afri- can music industry. Charry (2000) has explored the combinations of old and new practices and their export dimensions in the career of Toumani Diabate. Rabine’s (2002) study of a comparable industry, African fashion, emphasizes the impor- tance of informal global networks.

6. In 1994 I took part in a panel discussion at the WOMEX event in Brussels with an executive from PolyGram (now Universal). The PolyGram representative (not a specialist in World Music but a corporate lawyer) showed a promotional film of his company’s World Music acts, including the Malian singer Oumou Sangare. During the discussion that followed the speeches, a represen- tative of World Circuit Records pointed out that Sangare was no longer a PolyGram artist but now recorded for World Circuit.

World Music and tHe global Music industry 229

One very visible effect of the export earnings of African music can be seen in the career of Youssou N’Dour, the Senegalese musician often described as the genre’s first superstar. He has to a large extent repatriated his earnings from record sales, publishing royalties and tours and invested in several music and media business ventures in Dakar that are said to employ 300 people (Moss 2007). Despite this positive sign, there is little evidence that the success of World Music has created more widespread music industry growth in Africa (or wider economic growth, in tourism, for example). Some World Music artists have pre- ferred to retain their earnings in Europe, where several leading African stars are now based for at least part of the year. But, more crucially, the entrepreneurs of World Music are almost all based in Europe and North America and with few exceptions these record companies and festival organizers have shown no inclina- tion to reinvest their profits in Africa, Asia or Latin America.7 They remain import- ers of music only, although some have initiated and financed recording projects in World Music origin countries. A famous example is that of the Buena Vista Social Club, whose recording programme was organized and financed in Havana by the British owned World Circuit label. More often, the European or North American World Music record companies issue recordings under licence that have already been created within the com- plex networks of musicians and entrepreneurs in the origin countries. Frequently, these releases are compilations of tracks by different artists, the implication being that it would be too difficult to persuade World Music audiences to buy a whole album by an individual artist outside the handful of well-known stars of the festi- val and concert circuits. While there is no possibility of direct investment from the international music industry, the visible international popularity of World Music has prompted a grow- ing awareness of the music’s potential to aid economic growth in Africa among intergovernmental agencies and some national governments. One practical effect of this interest has been short-term efforts to aid exports. Some governments have enabled artists to perform at showcase events at the WOMEX trade fair and the Agence Intergouvernmentale de la francophonie has assisted African and Caribbean record companies to promote themselves in Europe. In 2004, the agency organized a presence at the MIDEM industry fair in Cannes for 30 labels from 15 countries, quoting its earlier successful efforts in pro-

7. One exception was the 2005 decision of U.S.-based digital music distributor The Orchard to establish an office in Kenya to digitize and sell music from the Kenya Copyright Association. The company intended to expand into the sale of music from other African countries.

230 PoPular Music History

moting Cesaria Evora, Habib Koite and Magic System. In 2006, the 79 nations of the Africa-Caribbean-Pacific group sponsored a showcase festival in the Domini- can Republic featuring artists from all three regions. In the longer term, the consensus view amongst national and international agencies is that the potential for music exports can best be achieved through sup- port for a more effective domestic industry infrastructure. The United Nations development agency UNCTAD, for example, has identified culture in general and music in particular as a potential source of export income for developing countries (Andersen et al. 2000). CISAC has an African regional committee to assist national collection societies, whose revenues in 2004 were only about 1% of the global total of US$6.6 billion shown in Table 2. The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) has organized training courses for government officials and promulgated its own Development Agenda (May 2007: 76–82). The World Bank set up a music business pilot project in Senegal in 2003. The programme was part of a wider programme for Private Sector Development and involved a US$5 million loan from the World Bank and other agencies. The focus of the Senegal project was to improve copyright law and build the capacity of the national musicians’ union. The World Bank also reported that interest in similar music industry development projects had been expressed by industry or govern- ment agencies in Ghana, Mali, Cape Verde, Peru and Brazil (see also Collins’s chap- ter in this book). While these developments are welcome, they will have only a minimal impact in the context of the needs and potential of music in Africa and of the success of the World Music industry in the developed countries. As with many other areas of the twenty-first-century global economy, the moral and political imperative is to redress a massive imbalance.

References Andersen, Birgitte, Zelka Kozul-Wright and Richard Kozul-Wright. 2000. ‘The Case of the

Music Industry’. Discussion Paper no. 145 (January). Geneva: UNCTAD. Bohlman, Philip W. 2002. World Music: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University

Press. Broughton, Simon, Mark Ellingham and Richard Trillo, eds. 2006. The Rough Guide to World

Music. Vol. 1 Africa and Middle East. London: Penguin. Charry, E. 2000. Mande Music: Traditional and Modern Music of the Maninka and Mandinka

of Western Africa. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. CISAC. 2007. Authors’ Rights in the World: Confirmed Revenue Growth in 2004. Paris: CISAC. Cobo, Leila. 2005. ‘Six Questions with Tim Prescott’. Billboard (June 25): 45. Fairley, Jan. 2001. ‘The “Local” and the “Global” in Popular Music’. In The Cambridge Companion

to Pop and Rock, eds Simon Frith, Will Straw and John Street. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

World Music and tHe global Music industry 231

Feld, Steven. 2000. ‘A Sweet Lullaby for World Music’. Public Culture 30: 145–72. Foucault, Michel. 1977 [1975]. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, trans. Alan

Sheridan. New York: Pantheon. Frith, Simon. 1996. Performing Rites: On the Value of Popular Music. Oxford: Oxford University

Press. Gillett, Charlie. 1996. The Sound of the City: The Rise of Rock ’n’ Roll. 3rd ed. London: Souvenir

Press. Hudson, Mark. 1995. ‘Praise be!’ Guardian Weekend, September 30. IFPI. 2006a. ‘Recorded Music—Driver of a US$100 Billion Economic Sector’. Press release,

June 22. —2006b. Recording Industry Piracy Report. London: IFPI. —2006c. Recording Industry in Numbers 2006. London: IFPI. Laing, Dave. 2002. ‘Copyright as a Component of the Music Business’. In The Business of

Music, ed. Michael Talbot. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. May, Christopher. 2007. The World Intellectual Property Organisation: Resurgence and the Devel-

opment Agenda. London and New York: Routledge. Moss, Stephen. 2007. ‘I’m bringing a message’. Guardian G2 (March 21): 28. Negus, Keith. 1999. Music Genres and Corporate Cultures. London and New York: Routledge. Nercessian, Andy. 2002. Postmodernism and Globalisation in Ethnomusicology: An Epistemo-

logical Problem. Lanham, MD and London: Scarecrow Press. Peterson, Richard A., and David G. Berger. 1975. ‘Cycles in Symbol Production: The Case of

Popular Music’. American Sociological Review 40: 156–73. Pietilä, Tuulikki. 2009. ‘Whose Works and What Kinds of Rewards: The Persisting Question

of Ownership and Control in the South African and Global Music Industry’. Informa- tion, Communication & Society 12/2: 229–50.

Rabine, Leslie W. 2002. The Global Circulation of African Fashion. Oxford and New York: Berg.

Taylor, Timothy. 1997. Global Pop: World Music, World Markets. New York and London: Routledge.

Turino, Thomas. 2000. Nationalists, Cosmopolitans and Popular Music in Zimbabwe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Sweeney, Philip. 1991. Directory of World Music. London: Virgin Books. UNESCO. 2005. International Flows of Selected Cultural Goods and Services 1994–2003. Montreal:

UNESCO Institute for Statistics. Williamson, J., and M. Cloonan. 2007. ‘Rethinking the Music Industry’. Popular Music 26/2:

305–22.